Linfit

Still not got this sorted. Still getting "This site is not secure" messages even with both certs on the Smoothie box. Odd thing though - Our machines almost all cannot get out onto the internet directly - we force the Smoothie as the web proxy for web browsers using GPO and the firewall generally only allows traffic out from the Smoothwall box. If I put a firewall exception for outgoing traffic in for a specific machine, the issue goes away, even though the smoothie is still set as the proxy on that machine. Our firewall is an old ASA that is just controlling what type of traffic can come in and go out and on which ports, no filtering or inspection, no certs installed. This isn't an area I know much about, so suggestions welcome. It is with Smoothwall second line support now but they don't seem convinced its a smoothwall problem and I'm not sure.

Ours were done last week, although we were the first school in the area to have them and they were using us to trial their procedures. No issues with protests etc, I think because we were a trial school there was no annoucement that the programme had started. Uptake was not very high though, we reckon only about 30% of those eligible.

Yep, have that installed, cleared the cache, restarted web proxy with cleared cache, still not having it. Have to raise a ticket with them - can't do that without a logon, don't have a logon apparently. Oh, fun days......

Hmm. Deleted the old cert, restarted, still not working. Rejecting anything thats using a LetsEncrypt cert.

Thanks, not seen that. I have followed the instructions and installed the Lets Encrypt R3 intermediate cert. The ISRG RootX1 cert was already installed, which I thought covered the Lets Encrypt certs. Anyway, that now added, but doesn't seem to have fixed the issue. Is there any logging on the smoothwall box that can show me exactly whats happening on this anywhere ? UPDATE: I have looked in the certificate store on the mail server and found R3 DST Root CA X3 intermediate cert which expired yesterday. I am wondering if this is the cause of the issue ? I have added in the same intermediate cert as I added to the smoothwall box - R3 ISRG Root CA X3 but again, this has not fixed the issue. The DST Root CA x3 cert showing in Root CA's on the server does indeed expire today, but there is an ISRG Root X1

We have an on-site mail server (running MDaemon) which has a letsencrypt cert to allow https web access. It has two months to run. Come in this morning to find machines which use the smoothwall as a proxy are getting an error on attempting the https connection which amounts to the cert is not trusted by your computer. Access to this from outside the building or from machines not going through our smoothwall box is fine. This is a big problem as most staff obviously are going through the smoothwall box and so can't access their e-mail. If I switch MDaemon to accept http as well as https they can connect on http but obviously thats a reduction in security and not a long term fix. Was all working OK yesterday but nothing obvious has changed overnight. Is this likely something to do with the certificate chain ? Has something changed with LetsEncrypt certs ? This ares is not my strongpoint so any guidance on where to start looking would be appreciated.

You can't omit teachers if they teach a group. When we used them here the teachers of shared classes had to decide amognst themselves who was doing which classes. Sometimes they both wanted to contribute, which is fine as long as the "view others comments" box is ticked in Session Setup screen, so that they donlt end up contradicting each other. there are a number of reports you can run on Profiles from Reports>Profiles> to help you identify missing comments but I don't think there is a way for classroom staff to do this for their reports.

Do you use Lesson Monitor or only session registration ? If its Lesson Monitor, have you checked Tools>Setups>Lesson Monitor Options and checked that the Registration and Periods Pattern conforms to your timetable ? It sounds like you have not defined the registration period on this screen and this can cause "registration" to overlap with other lessons. Usually goes wrong if you have changed the timetable cycle/pattern.

First thing to do is to run Updates course memberships from the Tools>Academic Management>Course Management route. See if this makes any difference to your courses before you so anything more radical. All academic promotion really does is tells SIMS where you can use the Curriulum Promotion Wizard on the Acadmic Management screen - if all students are in the correct groups then there is no point in doing this now. Do you use NovaT for your timetable ? If so, do you know if the course levels were set when the timetable was first imported ?

The Paxton software will print badges and store photos and its very easy to use. We add the photos manually but we only use badges for staff - no 6th form here. I believe you can get an add-in for the Paxton software which will allow it to integrate with AD to help centralise things, but we don't use that.

Thats is what you would expect to see the first time you import a timetable into the new academuic year. I don't remember it being that in your face before and wondered if they had made the warning a bit more obvious in the last update. I had that exact same screen though when I did the first transfer a couple of weeks ago, went ahead and it was fine.

Thye are the owner if they teach the class, are the Head of Year, if its a year based one, or the Head of Dept/subject leader/supervisor in Academic Management. If you need someone to have access to the marksheet who is not the class teacher easiest way is to make them a supervisor of the group/subject in Academic Management

I had the same e-mail yesterday and went online yesterday. Yes, you have to cancel the existing appointment first, but when I did and then checked for a new one, they had appointments that afternoon - although I actually booked today and am going this evening - two weeks ahead of schedule. It looks like they have increased short term capacity to allow for the pulling forward of appointments.

SCCM - it just works. Except it never, ever does.

Cisco Stackwise connecting cables for Cisco 3750 switch series. 2x0.5m, 2x1.0m 2x3.0m Also equivalent for the 2960 series switches – (the ones with the molex type connectors on them) 10 of these, all 0.5m long. We are just North of Manchester, J19 M62 for collection.

We have a Stone AIO, rather old now but was working OK, with an ASUS mainboard and AMI UEFI bios. The system clock defaults to Monday 24th May 2032. Always. We have: Tried changing the time in the BIOS - it does not acknowledge any settings have changed on pressing F10 to save and exit. Removed and replaced the BIOS battery. Reset the BIOS. Updated BIOS to the latest version from the web. Swapped out the HD to use a known good copy of Windows on the same hardware. None of this makes any difference. Date reverts to May 2032 We got it to reset to 2009 after resetting the BIOS but it immediately reverted back. Machine is useless as it won't log on to the domain with such a big time difference, and its too big for windows to roll it back even though we have everything synced to the DC as a time server. Anyone got any suggestions or is the BIOS and therefore the mainboard b******d?

Got jabbed yesterday evening at Blackburn Cathedral courtesy of Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service, who appeared to be the main people staffing the place. Really efficient, 10 minutes from giving my name to leaving site. Very impressed at the organisation. Had the AstroZeneca jab. No symptoms overnight, feel fine at the moment, in work no problem. Interesting to see how the next 24 hours go. Reading the leaflet you get when I got home, "symptoms may include tiredness, general lethargy, aching in joints" - for me thats just a normal Monday.

Not doing anything about ours (all Chromebooks, we are a Google school) until after Easter, when hopefully the situation has clarified a bit. Plan is to ask for them back from some students, others will be allowed to keep them based on their needs. Should get a few tolleys worth back we can use around school. - - - Updated - - - Not doing anything about ours (all Chromebooks, we are a Google school) until after Easter, when hopefully the situation has clarified a bit. Plan is to ask for them back from some students, others will be allowed to keep them based on their needs. Should get a few tolleys worth back we can use around school.

Everyone is missing the point. The point of the testing is not to find out who is infected, or stop the infection from spreading. Its so that the government can say "LOOK, WE'RE DOING SOMETHING". If the point of the testing was to stop the spread then we would have been given the power to stop students who refused the test from coming to school.

Well, yes, we have, but only partly. If you looked at our building from the front it looks very sleek and modern, but if you go round the back and start lifting ceiling tiles its a different issue. The older bit leaks, is never warm, and is aprarently, quite dangerous. Of course, they should have done it right in the first place, and done it cheaper and quicker as a result, but if they wanted to do it right they wouldn't have used the BSF process to do it, or employed Carillion (in our case) to do it. I do agree though, that this seems somewhat geographically biased - I wonder why that might be ?

Yes, we are on the list too, and it was the Laingspan issue which clinched it for us too. Although the front of our site was new in 2011 the back half was a refurb of a late 60's building. They must have surveyed it at the time of the new build but for whatever reasons (i have my own views on that, BSF related) it was not actioned - they certainly knew about the issues with that building technique well before then. Aim is to start building in Sept - finish by Sept 2023. They have been doing survey data collection and prep work for months, but only about 4 of us knew about it here and we were not allowed to say anything even to colleagues until the announcement this morning.

We have looked into this and concluded that for a medium/large secondary with many students doing an exam at once it is not practical with the technology we have to do properly invigilated exams. You really have no control over the environment/equipment at the user end unless you issue students with pre-configured kit to do the exams. I know there are specialist tools for remote exams and have seen cases where students must be in view of the camera at all times, must have their hands in view, cannot leave the computer etc, but is this really practical with school age students ? How do you distinguish genuine technical problems from spurious issues designed to avoid doing the exam ? You would also need a much larger number of invigilators (with the relevant kit) as one person will only be able to properly monitor a small number of candidates.

I would agree that June or even later is common and indeed necessary. I probably don't have a complete timetable until mid-June and there will likely be teacher changes after that. If you hit scheduling difficulties late in the day and need to adjust the curriculum model to get it to work it would mean potentially changing the band/class allocation and you only want to do that job once.

Me and my tech both in - he is dealing with distributing DFE chromebooks - we had a large delivery just before christmas. Based on yesterday, lots of google password resets and staff requesting help with remote access for the third or fourth time. After today, we will likely be on a rota, one in, one out. Will think about that later today. We have about 60 key worker children based on yesterdays numbers. Only rota teaching staff are in, most of support staff are in today but thats likely to change from tommorow onwards once rotas and stuff going forward are sorted. Our Head said yesterday that staff not on rota should work from home but building facilities are open if they need them. Some are doing remote lessons on Meets and don't have the kit/room/privacy to do that at home. Key worker kids bubbles are based in IT rooms as they are doing the same online work as students staying at home.

Which they tried to do, but they suffer from terrible coorporate inertia, a poor organisational culture which stifles innovation and prevents rapid development techniques being used, the inability to appreciate (or have any interest in) what the customers actually need, a tendency to re-invent the wheel, off-shoring software development to people who have no cultural understanding of the market, so it proved impossible. They are in a complete no-win situation at the moment. the only possible way forward is to put all their revenue into a ground up new start with new management structures and rapid development, but Capita are incapable of that and any buyer will only be interested in milking the revenue for a few years and selling other crap to the customer base.